On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Mitch \(WebCob\) wrote: ...
> You were against a "special case" patch for dev-null - which I agree is not > needed now that I know the "one true way"(tm) > > What I was pondering was a general patch which would make communicating with > filter daemons (listening on file sockets or char devices) possible - and > that would be to skip the locking in these cases where it has no point - it > would have the side effect of allowing /dev/null to work, but that's not my > point here... It would allow direct delivery to things like spamd without a > stub spamc program to manage the socket. And maildrop does some kind of locking (flock?)? I apologize, I'm coming into this discussion at the end. Please describe what you are trying to do (specifically), what you think the problem is, what maildrop's behavior is, etc... -- Ensign Walnut approaches Dr. Crusher with caution... Jon Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> C and Python Code Gardener ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software. Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System offering advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes on 50+ platforms. Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
